jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I love flying and will continue to fly whenever I get the chance. Lately, I've gotten hooked on YouTube on my smart TV. There are lots of full-length programs, minus the commercials.

For the past few days, I've been watching TV shows from Discovery and Nat Geo about plane crashes or near crashes. What impressed me is how much it takes to get a plane into a disastrous situation. So many things have to be done wrong at just the right time for a plane to crash. Bad designs, bad maintenance, not following procedures, pilot error, company policy, and bad ground control procedures can all combine to bring a plane down, but it's seldom just one thing. Even after a thorough investigation of a crash has been completed, foreign governments have been known to reject the factual report because it shows them in a bad light.

Politics and company policy can also play a role in crashes. Some examples are the (foreign) government pressure to obey rather than to think, unwillingness of a junior officer to point out mistakes made by a senior captain, not being willing to bother a senior person when a problem develops, fear of reprisals and the end of a career if someone chooses safety over taking a chance.

The very first Boeing 747 delivered went to Northwest, and it came very close to crashing when a rudder control failed. They learned that this plane had been a test model, with thousands of hours of flying time and thousands of take-offs and landings performed before it became the property of Northwest. This rudder problem almost brought down two other 747's before the problem was solved.

The skill of the flight crews makes a huge difference in what happens after a problem develops. American and western European pilots have excellent training, while many foreign pilots and airlines are just hoping that they can take off and land without problems.

So, although, many planes have crashed, it usually takes a series of things going wrong to cause a serious problem, and almost every crash has resulted in changes that have made flying safer.

tainkc Loc: Kansas City

Are you getting ready to go on a trip or something? Lol.

JCam Loc: MD Eastern Shore

That's all true Jerry, but I've also long suspected that especially when the pilot(s) don't survive, the investigators all too often have a tendency to blame "pilot error" when some other error(s) or failure(s) contributed to or preceded the fatal event.

They have to find something, and a dead pilot can't argue.

If you are a pilot, why don't we see aerial photos from you?

sarge69 Loc: Ft Myers, FL

You folks aren't helping when I'm flying to Belgium from Miami over vast distances of water 3 July 2015 returning on 15 July and then 16 July flying to St Louis for a VietNam reunion.

Tight schedule but resting until Oct when we fly from Ft Myers to Miami, then San Juan, PR for an onward flight to Martinique.

Sarge69

dirtpusher Loc: tulsa oklahoma

look up faa accident and incidents daily reports.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I wish! I think I have enough air points for a trip. I'll have to check. I love flying, probably because I do it so infrequently. My first real jet ride was on a 707 out of JFK, in the early 1960's. It was like a get-acquainted flight, just to demo the plane. We got a ride up the Hudson River and back - about an hour. We did it the following week, too. We also took a helicopter ride from JFK to Laguardia, just for the fun of it. The 747 was always my favorite, but they're few and far between now.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

Just the opposite, Sarge. It takes a lot of screw-ups by a lot of people to give a plane serious problems. More often than not, the flight crew bring the plane in safely. Now Russian planes are a different thing altogether. I was on a tour in China, and for a flight from one city to another, a Russian plane showed up. The tour company put us up in a hotel, and we got a real plane the next day. In this series I'm watching, they showed a few Russian crashes, and they weren't surprising at all - lack of training, lack of maintenance, bad management, etc.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

That was one of the comments in this series, but they really do want to find the actual cause of the crash, and the investigators take it as a personal failure if they cannot document exactly why the plane crashed. Saying it was pilot error is like saying the plane crashed - no useful information.

No, I'm not a pilot, but I do have lots of aerial shots - somewhere. A friend was a pilot, and I went up with him in his small plane. When I was in college, the guy down the hall had his license. He got three other guys together, and we all chipped in to rent a four-seater. It was nice until he demonstrated stalling re-starting while we were flying over the Hudson River. Kind of exciting. He pulled into a steep climb, the stall buzzer sounded, and all was silent. Then he put the plane into a steep dive to get it started. Yeah, lots of fun.

Ace Backerds Loc: Nashville, Tn.

My very first plane ride was a 707 in 1963. Every person on that plane was in a suit or dress. That was class. Just look at it now.

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

My brother, who was at an embassy in Asia, advises me that the Sultan of Brunei, who has his own 747, contracts for flight crew from Lufthansa - he does not want a Muslim flight crew because they tend to think that if something bad happens that it is the "will of God". He wants a flight crew that will do everything they can to stay alive! He also told me that some of the regional airlines in Asia, rather than having an in-flight safety briefing, simply have the Muslim prayer for the traveler. I say: why not hedge your bets and do both?

sb Loc: Florida's East Coast

Yes - mass transportation for the unwashed masses... I am happy to be more comfortable than back in the "good old days". I am surprised at the number of women who wear high-heels, though, when they travel. I cannot imagine running from terminal to terminal, schlepping your luggage, in high-heels!

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

That was a different time, in many ways.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I flew to London on Kuwaiti Airlines in the 1980's, and they began the flight with a Muslim prayer. We got there and back, so it worked. It was a beautiful plane with good service and good food, and it was the first time I had seen a plane that showed our progress, speed, altitude, outside temp, etc., on a screen

ecblackiii Loc: Maryland

Jerry, I'm afraid your source was a bit sloppy with the facts. The first 747 was actually rolled out on September 30, 1968 and was not involved in the incident you referenced. The first production 747 went to Pan Am Airlines in January 1970. I believe the flight incident you referred to was on Northwest Flight 85, which experienced a rudder hardover event on October 9, 2002. That aircraft was not the first 747. It was the first production model of the 747-400. Contrary to the story, it had not been part of the testing and certification program and was delivered to Northwest on December 8, 1989. So the aircraft had already been in use by Northwest for nearly 13 years when the incident occurred. The NTSB discovered an unusual fatigue crack in the power control module for the rudder, and that it was not possible to visually inspect for that type of failure. So to detect a future impending fatigue problem, airlines are now required to perform ultrasonic inspections of high time control modules. BTW, the aircraft involved, registration number N661US, is now owned by Delta (via merger with Northwest), is still flying and will be retired to a museum later this year after more than a quarter century of service.

Skellum0

It takes a series of things to go wrong OR one determined pilot